381 

52 

py 1 



The Southern Question, 



A VIEW 



OF THE 



POLICY AND CONSTITUTIONAL 



Powers of the President, 



AS TO 



THE SOUTHERN STATES. 



By J. P. BISHOP, 

OF THE CLEVELAND BAR. 



CLEVELAND, O. : 
PRINTED BY FAIRBANKS & COMPANY, 

1877. 



The SoLithern Question. 



A TIEW 



OF THE 



POLICY AND CONSTITUTIONAL 



Powers of the President, 



AS TO 



THE SOUTHERN STATES. 



By J. P. BISHOP, 

OF THE CLEVELAND BAR. 




CLEVELAN,D, O. : 

PRINTED BY FAIRBANKS & COMPANY, 

1877. 



FIq,s 



Cbl. 



[From the Cleveland Herald.] 



THE SOUTHERN QUESTION. 



We give in this issue an article by Judge 
Bishop on the Southern poHcy of President 
Hayes which is deserving careful attention. 
The purpose of the Judge was to meet the 
objections which have been made to that 
policy by earnest Republicans who have 
seen in it an abandonment by tne President 
of the principles of the party which placed 
him in his present position. 

The declarations of the Convention which 
nominated him, the expression of his views 
contained in the letter of acceptance, and 
the reiteration of that expression in his In- 
augural are quoted to show that in adopting 
his course toward the Southern States the 
President has violated no promise or pledge 
given to the Republican party, but on the 
contrary is carrying out the promises 
he made and is acting in strict accordance 
with the principles laid down in the plat- 
form of the Convention which nominated 
him. If that platform and his public declar- 
ations in accepting the nomination and in 
entering upon the duties of the office to 
which he was elected were to be anything 
but empty professions, merely made to de- 
ceive, there was no other course open to him 
than that which he has taken. President 
Hayes can have deceived none but those who 
expected that on taking office he would de- 
ceive the public by breaking the promises 
he had made before his election. 

Again, Judge Bishop shows that under 
the circumstances the President could 



scarcely, without grave impropriety — to use 
the lightest expression under the ciicum- 
stances possible— have refused to withdraw 
the troops from their position of interfer- 
ence in a contest for the Governorship in the 
States of South Carolina and Louisiana. The 
Supreme Court decisions quotea go to show 
that such interference, in cases representing 
the features of those in the two States 
named, finds but doubtful warrant in the 
Constitution, if not absolutely prohibited by 
that instrument. The fact that the use of 
the troops for such a purpose cot only re> 
ceived no countenance from Congress but 
was in direct violation of the wishes of the 
popular branch of that body, furnished an- 
other justification of the President's course. 
We believe the opposition to the Presi- 
dent's Southern policy is rapidly diminish- 
ing, and should it prove successful in paci- 
fying the South and increasing its material 
prosperity without seriously endangering 
the peace and welfare of any class of its 
citizens — and that can only be determined 
by actual experiment — the wisdom of ibe 
course adopted will be generally admitted. 
If expectations of a satisfactory outcome of 
the experiment are disappointed, there will 
still remain the machinery provic'ed by the 
Constitutional amendments, and the laws 
which have been or may be passed under 
those amendments, for the protection of the 
oppressed and the punishment of the wrong- 
doers. 



THE SOUTHERN QUESTIOiN. 



A VIEW OF THE POLICY AND CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS 
OF THE PRESIDENT, AS TO THE SOUTHERN STATES. 

By J. P. BISHOP. OF the Cleveland bae. 



To Hon. Stierlock J. Andrews, Hon. Horace 
Foote, and Hon. Samnel B. Prentiss: 
With yo"r consent I inscribe to you tbe fol- 
lowing brief "View" of a great National 
question. 
I do thi? for two reasons : 
First— That distinguished and honored as 
you are as citizens, lawyers, and jurists, I may 
be careful to present only the true "view." 
Second— That if there is error in this "View" 
it may readily be detected and exposed. 

J. F. Bishop. 
Cleveland, May, 1877. 



During the Presidential conflict which has 
recently terminated In the inauguratioa ot 
Rutherford B. Hayes as President of the 
United States, I had occasion thoroughly to 
examine the Federal Constitution, and es- 
pecially those provisions which related to 
the validity of the election of Presidential 
Electors, and the manner of transmitting, 
opening, counting, and declarins the result 
of the Electoral vote. Since the inaugura- 
tioa another conflict has arisen, not as to the 
office, but as to the policy of the Adminis- 
tration, This conflict has assumed the more 
serious aspect since it is among those mainly 
who were active in securing the election of 
the President whose policy is called in 
question. The policy thus questioned is 
called 

PRESIDENT HAYES' SOUTHERN POLICY. 

The most conspicuous of those calling 
this policy in question is Ex-Senator Wade. 
But many other very distinsruished citizens 
are more or less emphatic in expressing dis- 
approval of this policy. Having observed 
this, I have been desirous of a=!certaining 
the cause of these complaints and the 
foundation on which they rest, and the 
constitutional warrant botli for and against 
this "Southern policy." 



Mr. Wade claims to have been grietously 
deceived by the course of the new Adminis^ 
tration and as bitterly repentant that he ever 
was instrumental in favoring or using his 
influence m the nomination or election of 
President Hayes. This is the more to be 
regretted, as generally those arraigning the 
President are (many of them) citizens of the 
noblebt impulses and have occupied distin- 
f;uished and useful positions in their several 
States and in the National Government. 
This is most emphatically so with Senator 
Wade. 

Now that we flnd ourselves thus situated 
at the very threshold of the present Admin^' 
istration, like the pilot and officers of the 
ship at sea in a storm, when dnven about 
in its course, before we venture to proceed 
very far we should take our observations, 
see to our bearings and soundings. 

And let us consider at the outset — 

HAS THE PRESIDENT DEPARTED FROM THE 
POLICY JIARICED OTTT FOR HIM BY HIS PAR- 
TY A^D ACCEPTED BY HIM? 

This can only be ansvsrered by examining 
the Republican platform adopted on this 
subject when the nomination was made and 
the acceptance of it. 

THE RESOLUTION RELATING TO THIS QUES- 
TION. 

"3. The permanent pacification of the 
Southern section of the Union, and the com- 
plete protection of all its citizens in the free 
snjoyment of all their rights is a duty to 
which the Reiuiblican party stands sacredly 
pledged. The power to provide for the en- 
forcement of the piinciples embodied in the 
recent constitutional amendments is vested 
by those amendments in the Congress of the 
United States, and we declare it to be the 
solemn obligation of the legislative and ex- 
ecutive departments of the Government to 



put into immediate and vigorous exercise 
all their constitutional powers for removing 
any just causes of discontent on the part of 
any class, and for securing to every Ameri- 
can citizen complete liberty and exact equal- 
ity in the exorcise of all civil, political, and 
public rights. To this end we imperatively 
demand a Congress and a Chief Executive 
whose courage and fidelity to these duties 
shall not falter until these results are placed 
beyond dispute or recall." 

GOVERNOR hates' LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE 
OP THE NOMINATION. 

As to the platform as a -whole he says: 
"The resolutions are in accord with my 
views and I heartily concur in the principles 
which they announce." 

Then, upon the subject of this resolution 
he expressed his opinions without reserve 
and most emphatically. I give the part of the 
letter bearing upon the subject: The letter 
says: "The condition of the Southern States 
attracts the attention and commands the 
sympathy of ihe people oc the whole Union 
in their progressive recovery from the effects 
of the war. Their first necessity is an 
intelligent and honest administration 
of the Government which will protect all 
classes of citizens in all their political and 
private rights. What the South most needs 
is peace and peace depends upon the 
supremacy of law. There can be no endur- 
ing peace if the constitutional rights of any 
portion of the people are habitually disre- 
earded. A division of political parties, rest- 
ing merely upon the distinctions of race, or 
upon sectional lines, is always unfortunate 
and may be disastrous. 

"The welfare of the South, alike with that 
of every part of the country, depends upon 
the attractions it can offer to labor, to im- 
migration, and to capital; but labortrs will 
not go, and capital will not be ventured 
where the Constitution and laws are set at 
defiance, and distraction, apprehension, and 
alarm take the place of peace-loving and 
law-abiding social life. All parts of the 
Constitution are sacred, and must be sacred- 
ly observed — the jMrU that are new no less 
than the parts that are old. The moral and 
material prosperity of the Southern States 
can be most effectually advanced by a 
hearty and generous recognition! of the 
rights of all by all — a recognition without le- 
serve or exception. With such a recogni^ 
tion fully accorded, it will be practicable to 
promote by the influence of all legitimate 
agencies of the General Government the ef- 
forts of the people of those States to obtain 
for themselves the blessings of honest and 
capable focrt? government. 

" If elected, I shall consider it not only 
my duty but it will be my ardent desire to 



labor for the attainment of this end. Let me 
assure my countrymen of the Southern 
States that if I shall be charged with the 
duty of organizing an administration, 
it will le one which will re- 
gard and cherish their truest interests 
— the interests of the white and colored 
people both and equally; and which will put 
forth its best eft'ortsin beha'f of a civil polis 
cy which will wipe out forever the distinc - 
tion between the North and South in our 
common eountry." 

I have given ail that the letter contains on 
the suoject under discussion. I will not 
pause here nor take the time and space to 
analyze the resolution and the acceptance of 
it just given, but will presume upon the 
candor and intelligence of the reader of this 
article, and leave each one to analyze and 
compare for himself the "Resolution" and 
the "Letter." When this is done, a candid 
judgment can be formed of what Governor 
Hayes said and what he intended when he 
wrote and made public his letter of accept" 
ance. 

WHAT WAS THE INTENTION OF GOVER- 
NOR HAYES ON THIS SUBJECT AS EXPRESSED 
IN THIS LETTER ? 

Brieflv stated, it was the expressed deter- 
mination in good faith, and with the exercise 
of tue powers which his position as Execu- 
tive of this great Nation should give him, to 
effect "the permaiievi pacification of the 
Southern section of the Union and the com- 
plete protection of all its citizens in the free 
enjoyment of all their rights," as is ex- 
pressed in the first lines of Ihe resolution. 
The great burden of the letter on this point 
was as to the most sure method and means 
of accomplishing "■tlie permanent pacification 
of the Southern section of the Unions 

No careful reader of the resolution and 
letter can come to any other conclusion . 
How could this be done in the most effectual 
and speedy manner was the leading thought 
and the great burden on the mind of the 
writer as he penned the letter. The resolu- 
tion was emphatic and so is the letter. 

The resolution declares that Congress, by 
the recent constitutional amendments, is vest- 
ed with the power to provide for the enforce- 
ment of the principles embodied in the "re- 
cent" amendments, and Congress and tbe 
Executive are called upon so to act by the 
exercise ot all their constitutional powers dS 
to remove any just cause of discontent on 
the part of any class, and to secure complete 
liberty and equality to every American citi- 
zen in the exercise of all civil and political 
rights. 

The letter is to the same effect, but at the 
same time the drift of the letter is so plain 
"that he that runneth may read" that Gov* 



5 



ernor Hayes had in view the attainment of 
this end, not by cultivating the "arts of 
war," but the "arts of peace," by endeavor- 
ing to brinff about "an era of good feel «• 
ing," when the citizens of the different sec- 
tions and races of this Nation "shall not," 
for the purpose of contending with each 
other, "learn war any moie," but "shall 
beat their swords into ploughshares and 
their spears into p'uning-books." We see, 
then, that the Convention in nominating, 
and Governor Haves in accepting, were in 
accord. 

THE INAUGURAL. 

Has there then been a departure I)y the 
President since his inauguration from his 
former professed policy? Was there any 
indication of such departure in his inaugur- 
al address? I can only refer to this very 
briefly. 

In the introductory part of the address he 
uses this language: "I wish now, when eve- 
ry motive for misrepresentation has parsed 
away, to repeat what was said before the 
election, trusting that my countrymen will 
candidly weigh and understand i% and that 
they will feel assured that the sentiment de- 
clared in accepting the nomination for tHe 
Presidency will be the standard of my con- 
duct in the path before me " 

And then he proceeds immediately to 
speak of 

"the SOUTH." 

The very same views are expressed as in 
his "acceptance," only he is, if possible, 
more emphatic, and discusses the subject 
more at length. 

It is evident from the whole tenor of the 
address that he desired and would aim at 
promoting and establishing in the South 
"the inestimable blessing of a wise, honest, 
aad peaceful selt-government," and he ex- 
pressed the opinion unqualifiedly that 
"the evils which affect the Southern 
States can only be removed or remedied 
by the united and harmonious efforts of both 
races actuated by motives of mutual sympa- 
thy and regard." 

He spoke ot the need of material jnvsperi- 
ty which was arrested by tlie war, and says: 
"But the basis of all prosperity for that as 
well as for every other part of the country 
is the improvement of the intellectual and 
moral condition of the people — universal 
suffrage should rest upon education. To 
this end liberal and permanent provision 
should be made for the support of free 
schools by the United States." 

The letter of acceptance and the inaugural, 
both, are opposed to maintaining Southern 
State Governments by force, and by the use 
of the army and navy. If anything is clear 
this is clear. If aaything is certain, this is 



certain. No citizen bad a right to expect 
the contrary. 

THE CONDITION OF THE SOUTH AT THE IN- 
AUGURATION OF PRESIDENT HAYES. 

The new President found the whole South 
in a state of ferment and excitement un- 
paralleled since the war. The people had 
been led to believe that instead of being 
liberated from the rule they have had since 
the war, backed by armed force, in some 
cases, they were now ebout to experience 
the force of " the iron heel of despotism," 
and that from this they saw no [)rospeci of 
escape. This was a false view, but It was 
difficult to get them to understand it so; 
though it would not have been difficult if 
they had read wliat the President haa 
written and declared, b.oth before and at the 
time of his accession to the office. 

THE PRESIDENT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH 
HIMSELF. 

He had already declared against force in 
the "pacification of the South," at lea^t un-' 
til an honest effort had been made by "ihe 
arts of peace" to accomplish this most im- 
portant object, compared with which other 
matters were ii significant. 

Wbatthen was to be expected of Governor 
Ha_,es on his accession to the Presidency? 

Surely, as American citizens, having a 
just regard for the character and 
iionor of the Nation and its Executive 
head, nothing less should or could h<tve 
been aemanded or expected but that, using 
all proper precautions, he should withdraw 
the military and leave the State civil power 
to try the cxperinient , a*; least, of governing, 
according to his expressed views as before 
given. 

This he has done— no more, no less. If 
the experiment fails there still remains the 
constitutional and legal powers vested in 
him as President of the United States and 
in Congress to apply all needful remedies 
warranted bv the Constitution and the laws. 

Independeh'. of e-rprensed views, as above 
given, what ims th' President's duty? 

Supposing President Hayes not in any 
way to have been committed to the policy 
adopted by him on his accession to the 
ofiice, what then was his duly? Fir.st of all 
i he must himself obey the Constitution and 
laws made for his guidance. This he must 
(/<? not merely in their letter, but in their 
spirit. 

He turns to the Constitution, which is 
first of all his guide, and he finds in the pre- 
amble that this instrument was adopted "in 
order to form a more perfect union, establish 
justice, insure domestic tranquility, "etc. He 
looks to the South and sees anything 
but"peifect union" and "domestic tranquil- 
ity." He sees, too, that the strong arm of 



the military power of the Government is, 
and has been, used to promote union and 
tranquility, but has failed. 

Moreover, he bears in mind that there i" a 
solemn requisition of the Constitution Ui.d'^ 
ing upon the President and upon his con- 
science as well as his intellect, which is as 
follows: 

" Before he eaters on the execution of his 
office he shall take the following oath or 
affirmation: 

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I 
will faithfully execute the office of Presi- 
dent of the United Stales, and will, to the 
best of my ability, pieserve, protect, and de- 
fend the Constitution of the United States." 

He knows also that by that same instru- 
ment he is made "Commander-in-Chief of 
the Army pnd Navy of the United States." 

He well knows that another most re* 
sponsible duty is incvmbent upon him by 
the Constitutional provision, which is as 
follows: "He shall take care that the laws 
hefaitlifiilly executed. " 

The President in perusiua; the Constitu^ 
tion finds this further provision : 

"The United States shall guarantee to 
every State in this Union a republican form 
of government, and shall protect each of 
them against invasion; and, on application 
of the Legislature, or the Executive (when 
the Legislature cannot be convened), against 
domestic violence." 

Then he finds among the amendments 
these provisions: 

"Tue enumeration in the Constitution of 
certain rights shall not be construed to deny 
or disparage others retained by the people." 

''The powers not delegated to the United 
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited 
by it to the States, are reserved to the States 
respectively, or to the people." 

THE president's POLICY TO BE CONTROLLED 
BY THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS. 

Governed by the Constitution ani laws, in- 
dependent of other considerations, what 
would be the unavoidable conclusion of the 
President as to the policy he should 
adopt as to the South? He has already 
taken the oath to "faithfully execute the 
office" and to the "be.st of" his "ability pre- 
serve, protect, and defend the Constitution 
of the United States." He is now to "take 
care that the laws be faithfully executed." 
Naturally enough the President, finding the 
military controlling or sustaining the civil 
power in certam States, searches for flit 
warrant for so doiuir, and to ascertain what 
warrant for this is found under that pro- 
vision of the Constitution that "the United 
States shall guarantee to every State in this 
Union a republican form cf government" 
and "against domestic violence." 



In construing the provisions of the Con- 
stitution we cannot presume a power where 
none is given. There are implied powers, 
but they are only for the purpose of carry- 
ing out those expressly granted. This has 
been long established by the iiighest author- 
ity. 

"The Federal Government is one of dele« 
gated powers. All powers not delegated to 
it or inhibited to the States are reserved to 
the States or to the people." 

Briscoe vs. Bk,, Ky., 11 Pet., on p. 317. 

"The National Government possesses no 
powers but such as have been delegated to 
it. The States have all but such as they 
have surrendered " 

Gilman vs. Phila., 3 Wallace, on p. 73-5. 

WHO SHALL DECIDE 

Whether the contingency has arisen for 
interfering to guarantee "a republican form 
of government" or "against domestic vio^ 
lence"V 

When the que?tion to be determined is as 
to whether a State has a republican form of 
government, it has been established bv the 
highest authority of the Nation that Con- 
gress only has the power to decide under 
this Article of the Constitution, "What 
Government is the established one in a 
State." [Luther vs. Borden, 7 How. 42.] It 
is held by the same authority that in case of 
"domestic violence" Congress might and has 
conferred upon tbe President the right to 
decide, and his decision is conclusive. "He 
is to act upon the application of the Legis- 
lature or of the Executive,and consequently 
he must determine what bodj' of men con- 
stitute the Leaislature and who is the Gov-' 
ernor before he can act." [Id. 42-3 ] 

Another point decided is that if the rec- 
ognized State judicial tribunals have de- 
termined this question, that is conclusive 
and will be recognized by the various de- 
partments of the National Goyernment. It 
was so settled in the case of Luther vs. 
Borden [7 How. 40], growing out of the 
Dorr rebellion. 

The rule of decision in the Supreme 
Court of the United States is " That the 
courts of the United States adopt and follow 
the States courts in questions which concern 
merely the Constitution and laws of the 
State "—[Id. 40.] 

So far has this principle been carried that 
the Federal Supreme Court has in several 
instances reversed its own decisions to 
make them conform to the decisions of the 
highest court of a State. Green vs. Neals, 
lessee, 6, Pet. 291. Suydam vs. Williamson, 
24 How. 427. 

The President cannot interfere in any case 
where the only question is whether the State 
is under "a republican form of govern- 



ment." Congress is the sole judge of that. 
He can interfere in the case of "domestic vi- 
olence" only on ihe application of the Ex- 
ecutive "when the Legislature cannot be 
convened." 

When the present Executive came into 
office he found two sets of State officers and 
two Legislatures in each of the States of 
South Carolina and Louisiana, claiming to 
be the lawfuland constitutional authorities. 
So far as South Carolina was concerned, the 
Supreme Court of the State had already de-^ 
cided that the Returning Board could not 
exercise the power claimed and thereby 
change the result in the State — that the le- 
gality or illegality of the election of State 
officers must be tne subject of after consid- 
eration before the proper State tribunals. 
This substantially determined that Hampton 
and those of the same party w^ere eleeted, and 
not Chamberlain and nis party. The author- 
ly of the Supreme Court, as a lawfully con- 
stituted court, was not disputed. Following 
the decision of Luther vs. Borden before re- 
ferred to ij would seem that no alternative 
was left to the President but the withdrawal 
of the troops from the support of either par« 
ty. 

As to Lou'siana, the President found 
that in the then condition of things he could 
not, if he would, decide intelligently which 
party was entitled to be treated as the law- 
ful, constitutional Government of the State. 
If neither party was entitled to be recog-* 
nized as such in the present state of atfairs, 
then the contingency had not arisen for his 
interference in the State as in a case of 
"domestic violence." It was then for Con- 
gress solely to guarantee a republican foim 
of government." 

THE LOUISIANA CO.MMISSIOK. 

In this state of things the President 
appointed a commission for the double 
purpose of effecting an amicable adjust- 
ment of differences and of ascertaining the 
legal and constitutional status of the claim- 
ants of each party to be the lawful State au- 
thorities. 

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. 

This commission made its report setting 
forth the claims of each party, and especial- 
ly the claim that while the Returning Board 
liad the power to act as to the election of 
Electors, that being left to the Legislature by 
the Constitution of the United States, yet as 
to State officers and members of the Legisla- 
ture that was fixed by constitutional provi- 
sion, and the Legislature could not inter- 
vene a returning board between the returns 
of local election boards and the authorities 
to whom the returns by the Constitution of 
the State were required to be made. If this 
claim i8 true— and it does not seem to be de- 



nied — then as to State officers and members 
of the Legislature the intervening return^ 
log board h'ld no authority. It is further 
ascertained that the Packard party had 
no power t > sustain itself independent of the 
military b sld there under the command of 
the President. Under this state of things 
it was advised by the commission that a 
union of members otthe Legislature should 
be formed whose election was undisputed, 
and thus a foundation would be laid for a 
State Government whose authority would 
be unquestionable. A Legislature was so 
formed and coQstituted, and this Legislature 
recognized the NichoUs Government, and 
the other party abandoned it. Nicholls then, 
as before, demanded the withdrawal of the 
troops . 

In this condition of affairs what could 
be done in either State but withdraw the 
troops and leave the States of South Carolina 
and Louisiana to manage their own domestic 
affairs? 

The party in power in each State insisted 
on the withdrawal of the military of the 
United States, and the President had no con- 
stitutional or leaial authority to retain them 
there for the purpose of sustaining the op- 
posite party in power. 

There is no doubt a discretion given him 
to decide the question so as to even make 
a wrong decision effectual to maintain a 
party in power till Congress interferes and 
decides the matter. A corrupt decision even 
may do this. But it is not to be supposed 
that an Executive of the United States is 
capable of doing this, nor of even exercising 
an extremely doubtful power toward or 
against a State. 

THE PRESIDENT HAD NO ALTERNATIVE BUT 
THE WITHDRAW^AL OP THE TROOPS. 

This whole subject is under the power and 
authoritv of Congress. The President has 
no power or authority in the premises except 
what Congress confers upon him. Congress 
may also take away or modify at any time 
any power it may confer upon the President. 

Take a little retrospect. As to Louisiana, 
this controversy had been going on for years. 
During a portion of that time the Repub- 
lican party had a majority in both branch- 
es of Congress; but Congress did not then 
interfere to legislate and determine the ques- 
tion of interference. During the late Con- 
gress a large majority of the House were 
opposed to this policy in any Southern State, 
and no appropriation could be obtained for 
the army but subject to the prohibition that 
it should not be used in the Southern States. 

To say the most that can be said in favor 
of keep'ing the troops in these States, it is 
certainly extremely doubtful whether the 
President had any constitutional authority to 



^ 



Interfere by the use of the military power . 
In such a state of things the only proper 
course is to subrrlt the matter to Congress, 
from which he derives his power, and let 
that authority which is the source of all the 
power the President has in the premises take 
the responsibility, the Executive abiding the 
result. There is no other possible 
policy which President Hayes could or can 
adopt and carry out, even if he would 

THE MEANS OF SUSTAINING THE ARMY 

are withheld from him; ana if every othe" 
constitutional and legal means existed to 
justify keeping the military there to sustain 
a party in possession of the State Govern- 
ment, his efforts would be in vain. Aside 
from this, the President ought not, against 
the strongly expressed will of the popular 
branch of Congress, to insist on the military 
occupation of a State. 

THE KECONSTRUCTED STATES. 

It is supposed by many that these States 
having been in rebellion and reconstructed, 
tbey are to be treated differently from ottier 
States in regard to using the army and navy 
in executing the laws in those States, and 
"against aomestic violence." But no author~ 
ity whatever exists in relation to any South- 
ern State, as to using troops to sustain the 
Government against "domestic violence," or 
for any other purpose, .that does not exist as 
to Ohio or any otlier Western or Northern 
State, and no disciimination can be made 
agamst them under the Constitution and 
laws of the United States. 

It is the recognized invariable rule of law 
now held in the Federal Supreme Court 
that "A State entering into the Union since 
the adoption of the Constitution forms a 
Union with ihe other States as complete, as 
perpetual, and as indissoluble as the Union 
between the oriainal States." 5 Abb. Nat'l 
Dig.. 445, sec. 3-" Texas vs. White, 7 Wal- 
lace, 700. 

It is further held by the same authority 
that the States entering into the rebellion 
were never States out of the tFnion, but 
their rights were held in abeyance or sus- 
pended only till reconstructed under the 
authority of Congress. Texas vs. White, 7 
Wallace, 700; White vs. Hart, 13 Wallace, 
646. 

So when they were re admitted to the 
exercise of their State rights in the Union 
they stood precisely where they did before 
their attempted withdrawal or secession. 

THE RESOLUTION OF THE REPUBLICAN CON- 
VENTION BEFORE REFERRED TO. 

This resolution clearly contemplated ac- 
tion by Congress devising and inaugurating 
a policy, before it was expected the Presi- 
dent would or could act upon the subject. 



This is perfectly apparent from the whole 
tenor of the resolution, and it moreover de» 
Clares that "the power to provide for the 
enforcement of the principles embodied in 
the recent constitutional amendments is 
vested by those amendments in Congress," 
and then Congress and the Executive 
are called upon to act upon the sub- 
ject. In all this it is evident 
that the Convention understood that there 
was no sufficient legislation on the subject 
then existing, and the resolution looked fora 
ward to the election of a Congress that 
would provide the necessary remedy, and to 
the election of an Executive that would en-- 
force the provisions made; and of course 
there is no sufficient basis on which the 
President can now act — and as Congress is 
now constituted there is no present prospect 
that there will beany legislation on the sub- 
juct for the President to" carry out. 

CONCLUSION. 

1. Having fully gone over the ground in- 
tended when I commenced this paper, I be^ 
lieve every intelligent citizen, on careful 
reflection, will agree with me, that no one 
could possibly have been misled by any- 
thing which was written, said, or done by 
the President, up to aad including his inau-. 
guration into office, nor could any one have 
reasonably anticipated any other action than 
what has taken place as to the removal of 
troops. 

2. I think I have shown that since the in- 
auguration, the policy pursued by the pres- 
ent adminisa-ation in withdrawing the troops 
from South Carolina and Loui.=iana was, 
under the circumstinces, the only thing 
proper to be done, and was the only thing 
wnich could constitutionally or lawfully 
have been done. 

3. It is perfectly clear that the President 
had no alternative but the withdrawal of the 
military forces, as all supplies were refused 
and would have continued to be refused for 
the maintenance of the army or any portion 
of it used in any Southern State for the pur- 
pose of maintaining order, cr sustaining the 
authority of any parties claiminar to be the 
rightful Go^ermient of the State. 

Having carefully studied and considered 
the subject discussed, I have arrived at the 
foregoing conclusions, and now submit the 
result of my reflections and investigations to 
the judgment of others, trusting that the 
contents' of this paper may be siibjected to 
the severest scrutiny, and to the closest, but 
ai the same time, candid cv\i\c\im\ trusting 
also that if the true view is not here taken 
and (he correct conclusions arrived at on 
the subject discussed, some one will under- 
take the discussion and bring out the trite 
new. 



^ONGRES: 



\5?| 789 629 1 



i1 






lllli III'!; ii! I'll I i mil 



013 789 629 1 



pH83 



